A California man has filed a class action lawsuit against technology vendor, Fry’s Electronics. The lead plaintiff accuses the company of failing to fulfill the warranty as advertised at the time of purchase.
In late 2013, Aaron Ramos purchased an open-box PNY GeForce GTX graphics card from Fry’s Electronics. Open-box products are those which have packaging that has been previously opened and are sold to customers at a discounted rate. The packaging is not intact either because it was purchased and returned or because it was used as a display item.
When Ramos purchased the open-box graphics card, there was an advertisement on the box which Fry’s Electronics had added. It stated that Fry’s would honor the manufacturer’s original warranty. In this case, PNY offered a lifetime warranty for their product.
Ramos alleges this advertisement made him reasonably assume he would be entitled to a lifetime warranty from Fry’s. If he was aware Fry’s was not going to guarantee a lifetime warranty, he states, he would have purchased the item brand new from the manufacturer or from another retailer that does honor warranties.
A few years after Ramos purchased the graphics card, it began to malfunction. Believing he had lifetime coverage for the product, he asked Fry’s to replace the card or refund the original purchase price. Fry’s refused to honor either request because Ramos had not registered the product with the manufacturer, PNY.
Ramos alleges that Fry’s failed to inform him at the time of purchase that he would need to register the graphics card with PNY to be entitled to warranty coverage. He also alleges that even if they had told him, he would have been unable to do so. According to the lawsuit, Fry’s business practices make it impossible for customers who purchased used items to register them. This is because the company only provides the appropriate paperwork to customers who have purchased a new item.
The lawsuit has been filed on behalf of Aaron Ramos and any other Fry’s Electronics customers who have purchased a graphics card with a label guaranteeing to honor the manufacturer’s warranty. The purchase must have occurred within the statuary time limit. The suit is ordering the company to alert any customers that could be potential members of the class action lawsuit. They must warn these customers about the allegations of unlawful and deceptive conduct and must perform a corrective advertising campaign. The suit seeks award of actual, punitive, and statutory damages, coverage of court costs and attorney’s fees, and any other justice the court sees fit.
Ramos is represented by his attorneys, Todd M. Friedman, Adrian R. Bacon, Meghan E. George and Thomas E. Wheeler of Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman PC. The Fry’s Open-Box Products False Warranty Offer Class Action Lawsuit is Ramos v. Fry’s Electronics Inc., Case No. 3:17-cv-02320, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.